Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

What to do with Matt Flynn...
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Seattle Seahawks
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
jrry32


Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 45626
PostPosted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 12:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SaveourSonics wrote:
Let's look at Peyton's rookie season. I'll take Wilson's.


Why even make this comparison? Because you certainly wouldn't take Wilson over Manning AS A PLAYER.

Quote:
You never would have believed me in the preseason if I told you he'd have the highest single game QBR of ANY QB in the league.


Did you really just throw out that ESPN garbage stat? Yuck.

Frankly, I don't even know why you're bothering to fight this battle. You have a rookie QB who is playing amazing football. Sit back and enjoy it. If Osprey can't and doesn't like it, let him be unhappy.

I mean, seriously, there are still Rams fans who hate Sam and refuse to give him any sort of credit because the Rams chose him over Suh. Sounds absolutely retarded but every fanbase has those guys.

I mean, for example, he threw an 80 yard TD to Kendricks against the Bucs(hit him about 20 yards down the seam in stride and Kendricks ran the rest of the way untouched until he was tackled going into the end-zone after Amendola took out two defenders with a block).

And one of the fans who hates Sam tried to argue that Sam deserved no credit for the play and no credit for the TD drive(the 1 play TD drive) because Kendricks had to run the ball to the end-zone. And when confronted on this ridiculous opinion, his argument was that if Kendricks would have dropped it, what type of play would it have resulted in and what type of day would Sam have had...

People can be crazy and people can be bitter. It's just best to walk away, you can't reason with them.
_________________
The LBC wrote:
Harper41 wrote:
Don't worry. Sean Payton would pass the ball in a Tornado.

But would he do it in a Sharknado?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SwiftTexan


Joined: 15 Feb 2011
Posts: 3453
PostPosted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 1:27 pm    Post subject: Re: "hope that Wilson can lead" Reply with quote

BBIB wrote:
SwiftTexan wrote:


First of all - I'm pretty flattered that after 6 years on the forum this was your first post. Apparently my critique of Wilson was enough to bring you out of your shell.

I don't think the Drew Brees example is accurate - they are different players. Brees is much more of a pocket passer (and almost 2 inches taller by the way).

I think Wilson compares more favourably to Warren Moon, John Elway, Steve McNair, Steve Young, Randall Cunningham and ironically - Jim Harbaugh. He's a runner and that sets him apart. He's just a different kind of QB and we're just not used to seeing those guys win Superbowls - maybe it's the beginning of a new era with guys like this but we were told Vick was supposed to usher in a new era and its' been nothing but stand-still pocket QBs hoisting the trophy every year.

EDIT: I realise that some of the guys I compared Wilson to have won superbowls which seems to contradict my point but I still think the height is the issue. When Drew Brees came out people thought he was too short but his supporters said "He's only a couple inches shorter than so-and-so" - But I ask you - what happens if in the 2015 draft there's a QB with a great arm, leadership and all that stuff but he's 5'9" and you say - "He's only a couple inches shorter than Russell Wilson!" and then ten years later there's a QB that's 5'7" and you say "He's only a couple inches shorter than that guy!" Where does it end? There are reasons why having a QB that is short is bad and there are reasons why having a QB that is tall is bad. Why didn't Mutombo become a QB instead of a shot blocking basketball player? I'm not sure what my point is here other than to say I think it's silly to say "He's only a couple inches shorter than Brees" because Brees is already borderline not tall enough so being shorter than him is not a good thing - it's a bad thing. It's not a defense but rather an indictment of Wilson.


QBs with defensive supporting casts win Super Bowls with almost no exceptions

In fact the few exceptions statistically in the regular season in recent years in the Giants, Saints, and Colts had defenses that stepped up their level of play in the post-season

That's why Peyton Manning won it in a post-season where Peyton Manning had twice as many turnovers as TDs

That's why the Giants defense held the historically great Patriots offense to 14 and 17 points respectively in the post-season

That's why the Saints defense made big plays against 3 former all-PRO Qbs in the playoffs in Kurt Warner, Brett Favre, and sealed the Super Bowl with a pick six vs Peyton Manning.

Winning a Super Bowl has never had anything to do with height, it's just a pattern people have found and tried to make relevant

Kind of like when Peyton Manning was drafted it was a silly article saying that Drew Bledsoe was the only QB who was 6'5 or taller who had even made a Super Bowl


And the idea that 6'2 is an advantage over 5'10 when it comes to seeing over a 6'5 offensive linemen is laughable

You don't throw over people you throw in passing lanes. And it's release point and the size of a QB's hands that matter far more considering if you're 6'6 but have a release point like you're 6'0 it negates your height

Russell Wilson's height hasn't been an impediment in him having a chance to break Peyton Manning's rookie TD record by being far more efficient while doing it

And if the Seahawks fail to reach a Super Bowl this year it won't be because Russell Wilson was too short

If the Seahawks come up short, it will be because they get outplayed and it will probably be because of inexperience showing up in a hostile environment on the road

teams win super bowls??? What???

Anyway, I wasn't talking about height, its you that is hung up on his height, not me. I said Brees is a poor comparison because they are not the same player. I know what throwing lanes are but you can't tell me height isn't an obstacle that Wilson has been able to overcome thus far.

Anyway, i was just saying brees is a lazy comparison because of the height similarity.
_________________
The Ultimate Fantasy Football Challenge
FootballsFuture Fantasy Scrubs League
Discussion Thread Link
http://www.footballsfuture.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=550031
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SaveourSonics


Joined: 20 Apr 2008
Posts: 45415
Location: Sleepless in Seattle
PostPosted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 5:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jrry32 wrote:
SaveourSonics wrote:
Let's look at Peyton's rookie season. I'll take Wilson's.


Why even make this comparison? Because you certainly wouldn't take Wilson over Manning AS A PLAYER.


Straight up? Obviously not. Considering their age? Yea, I'll take Wilson. As rookies? Yea, I'll take Wilson, which is obviously a perfectly fine comparison considering Wilson is only a rookie.

Oh and I'd sure as hell take him over Badford Wink
_________________
'
Richard D!ck Sherman 4 Prez
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
jrry32


Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 45626
PostPosted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 6:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SaveourSonics wrote:
jrry32 wrote:
SaveourSonics wrote:
Let's look at Peyton's rookie season. I'll take Wilson's.


Why even make this comparison? Because you certainly wouldn't take Wilson over Manning AS A PLAYER.


Straight up? Obviously not. Considering their age? Yea, I'll take Wilson. As rookies? Yea, I'll take Wilson, which is obviously a perfectly fine comparison considering Wilson is only a rookie.

Oh and I'd sure as hell take him over Badford Wink


Well, that's a bad move. You're going to pass on the GOAT(arguably) as a rookie for Russell Wilson because Wilson has better numbers...huge mistake. You already know what Manning becomes...
_________________
The LBC wrote:
Harper41 wrote:
Don't worry. Sean Payton would pass the ball in a Tornado.

But would he do it in a Sharknado?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SaveourSonics


Joined: 20 Apr 2008
Posts: 45415
Location: Sleepless in Seattle
PostPosted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 6:58 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jrry32 wrote:
SaveourSonics wrote:
jrry32 wrote:
SaveourSonics wrote:
Let's look at Peyton's rookie season. I'll take Wilson's.


Why even make this comparison? Because you certainly wouldn't take Wilson over Manning AS A PLAYER.


Straight up? Obviously not. Considering their age? Yea, I'll take Wilson. As rookies? Yea, I'll take Wilson, which is obviously a perfectly fine comparison considering Wilson is only a rookie.

Oh and I'd sure as hell take him over Badford Wink


Well, that's a bad move. You're going to pass on the GOAT(arguably) as a rookie for Russell Wilson because Wilson has better numbers...huge mistake. You already know what Manning becomes...


Yea...obviously. I'm talking in a phonebooth, without hindsight aiding us. Just looking at rookie season versus rookie season. This isn't a hard concept Laughing
_________________
'
Richard D!ck Sherman 4 Prez
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
chpjns15


Joined: 21 Dec 2009
Posts: 1698
PostPosted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 7:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jrry32 wrote:
SaveourSonics wrote:
jrry32 wrote:
SaveourSonics wrote:
Let's look at Peyton's rookie season. I'll take Wilson's.


Why even make this comparison? Because you certainly wouldn't take Wilson over Manning AS A PLAYER.


Straight up? Obviously not. Considering their age? Yea, I'll take Wilson. As rookies? Yea, I'll take Wilson, which is obviously a perfectly fine comparison considering Wilson is only a rookie.

Oh and I'd sure as hell take him over Badford Wink


Well, that's a bad move. You're going to pass on the GOAT(arguably) as a rookie for Russell Wilson because Wilson has better numbers...huge mistake. You already know what Manning becomes...


He is obviously saying this assuming we dont know what Manning becomes. Show some common sense.

And I would easily take Wilson over Manning after their rookie seasons. Manning had 26 TDs and 28 INTs, while Wilson is at 25 TDs and 10 INTs and still had a game to play. Because we assuming that we dont know what Manning will become, I definitely take Wilson.
_________________
"Trying is the first step towards failure"


"If you can't win, cheat. If you can't cheat, don't play."


"Getting a paper cut, that is tragedy. Someone falling down a sewer and dying, that is comedy."
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SaveourSonics


Joined: 20 Apr 2008
Posts: 45415
Location: Sleepless in Seattle
PostPosted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 7:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

chpjns15 wrote:
jrry32 wrote:
SaveourSonics wrote:
jrry32 wrote:
SaveourSonics wrote:
Let's look at Peyton's rookie season. I'll take Wilson's.


Why even make this comparison? Because you certainly wouldn't take Wilson over Manning AS A PLAYER.


Straight up? Obviously not. Considering their age? Yea, I'll take Wilson. As rookies? Yea, I'll take Wilson, which is obviously a perfectly fine comparison considering Wilson is only a rookie.

Oh and I'd sure as hell take him over Badford Wink


Well, that's a bad move. You're going to pass on the GOAT(arguably) as a rookie for Russell Wilson because Wilson has better numbers...huge mistake. You already know what Manning becomes...


He is obviously saying this assuming we dont know what Manning becomes. Show some common sense.

And I would easily take Wilson over Manning after their rookie seasons. Manning had 26 TDs and 28 INTs, while Wilson is at 25 TDs and 10 INTs and still had a game to play. Because we assuming that we dont know what Manning will become, I definitely take Wilson.


Thank you, I didn't know if I was articulating myself poorly.
_________________
'
Richard D!ck Sherman 4 Prez
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
jrry32


Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 45626
PostPosted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 10:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

chpjns15 wrote:
jrry32 wrote:
SaveourSonics wrote:
jrry32 wrote:
SaveourSonics wrote:
Let's look at Peyton's rookie season. I'll take Wilson's.


Why even make this comparison? Because you certainly wouldn't take Wilson over Manning AS A PLAYER.


Straight up? Obviously not. Considering their age? Yea, I'll take Wilson. As rookies? Yea, I'll take Wilson, which is obviously a perfectly fine comparison considering Wilson is only a rookie.

Oh and I'd sure as hell take him over Badford Wink


Well, that's a bad move. You're going to pass on the GOAT(arguably) as a rookie for Russell Wilson because Wilson has better numbers...huge mistake. You already know what Manning becomes...


He is obviously saying this assuming we dont know what Manning becomes. Show some common sense.

And I would easily take Wilson over Manning after their rookie seasons. Manning had 26 TDs and 28 INTs, while Wilson is at 25 TDs and 10 INTs and still had a game to play. Because we assuming that we dont know what Manning will become, I definitely take Wilson.


I still take Manning. Just like I would take Calvin Johnson over Torrey Smith just considering their rookie years despite Torrey having better numbers. Both Torrey and Russell were in better situations while Calvin and Manning had better tools.

There's more to the game than stats. Wilson appears to have a bright future but stats or not, I wouldn't have considered taking him over Manning.
_________________
The LBC wrote:
Harper41 wrote:
Don't worry. Sean Payton would pass the ball in a Tornado.

But would he do it in a Sharknado?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hawksman81


Joined: 30 Mar 2009
Posts: 2571
Location: I am the Eyas
PostPosted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 10:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Peyton also threw 28 Ints compared to Russells 10 and Russell has rushed for 431 yards and 3 tds, compared to Mannings 62 yards and 0 Tds.

For only their rookie years, I would take Russell, easily.
_________________


SaveourSonics wrote:
I love D!ck

JustisM wrote:
Why'd they turn the lights on?
Big Ben is more effective in the dark.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
jrry32


Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 45626
PostPosted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 11:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

hawksman81 wrote:
Peyton also threw 28 Ints compared to Russells 10 and Russell has rushed for 431 yards and 3 tds, compared to Mannings 62 yards and 0 Tds.

For only their rookie years, I would take Russell, easily.


Yea, not surprising a bunch of Seattle fans want to find a way to claim Russell Wilson is better than Manning.

Manning threw 11 of his 28 ints in the first 3 games because he didn't start off as a game manager.

Wilson has played well but anyone who'd claim that they'd take Wilson as a rookie moving forward over Manning as a rookie moving forward(even with the idea of not knowing what Manning will become) is full of it.

Box score scouting.
_________________
The LBC wrote:
Harper41 wrote:
Don't worry. Sean Payton would pass the ball in a Tornado.

But would he do it in a Sharknado?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
hawksman81


Joined: 30 Mar 2009
Posts: 2571
Location: I am the Eyas
PostPosted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 11:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jrry32 wrote:
hawksman81 wrote:
Peyton also threw 28 Ints compared to Russells 10 and Russell has rushed for 431 yards and 3 tds, compared to Mannings 62 yards and 0 Tds.

For only their rookie years, I would take Russell, easily.


Yea, not surprising a bunch of Seattle fans want to find a way to claim Russell Wilson is better than Manning.

Manning threw 11 of his 28 ints in the first 3 games because he didn't start off as a game manager.

Wilson has played well but anyone who'd claim that they'd take Wilson as a rookie moving forward over Manning as a rookie moving forward(even with the idea of not knowing what Manning will become) is full of it.

Typical box score scouting.


Iím talking about strictly their rookie seasons, not going forward.
_________________


SaveourSonics wrote:
I love D!ck

JustisM wrote:
Why'd they turn the lights on?
Big Ben is more effective in the dark.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
SaveourSonics


Joined: 20 Apr 2008
Posts: 45415
Location: Sleepless in Seattle
PostPosted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 11:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

jrry32 wrote:
Typical box score scouting.


Or you don't know what the phrase "in a phone booth" means. It means, eliminating all context, which *gasp* includes your oh-so wise arm chair scouting. So please, master of scouting, tell me what Peyton did so much better than Wilson on in his rookie season? These "tools" you say, which does Peyton have better aside from size, since Wilson has pretty much already proven his size won't be an issue. I can tell you now that Wilson throws a better deep ball. He creates more mismatches in the running game and opens things up for our backs. He has less of a propensity for turnovers and can both manage and win games, which Peyton did not show in that rookie season.

Pretty easy to look back through history and pick Peyton. But excuse me, I have some more box scores to scout from Rolling Eyes
_________________
'
Richard D!ck Sherman 4 Prez
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
SaveourSonics


Joined: 20 Apr 2008
Posts: 45415
Location: Sleepless in Seattle
PostPosted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 11:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

hawksman81 wrote:
jrry32 wrote:
hawksman81 wrote:
Peyton also threw 28 Ints compared to Russells 10 and Russell has rushed for 431 yards and 3 tds, compared to Mannings 62 yards and 0 Tds.

For only their rookie years, I would take Russell, easily.


Yea, not surprising a bunch of Seattle fans want to find a way to claim Russell Wilson is better than Manning.

Manning threw 11 of his 28 ints in the first 3 games because he didn't start off as a game manager.

Wilson has played well but anyone who'd claim that they'd take Wilson as a rookie moving forward over Manning as a rookie moving forward(even with the idea of not knowing what Manning will become) is full of it.

Typical box score scouting.


Iím talking about strictly their rookie seasons, not going forward.


To clear the air, this is what I was initially intending to say as well (apparently I was articulating myself poorly?) but it's certainly not as cut-and-dry as you make it that we should all NEED Peyton going forward. So now, I'll make the argument for Wilson.
_________________
'
Richard D!ck Sherman 4 Prez
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
jrry32


Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 45626
PostPosted: Tue Dec 25, 2012 11:59 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

SaveourSonics wrote:


Or you don't know what the phrase "in a phone booth" means. It means, eliminating all context, which *gasp* includes your oh-so wise arm chair scouting. So please, master of scouting, tell me what Peyton did so much better than Wilson on in his rookie season? These "tools" you say, which does Peyton have better aside from size, since Wilson has pretty much already proven his size won't be an issue. I can tell you now that Wilson throws a better deep ball. He creates more mismatches in the running game and opens things up for our backs. He has less of a propensity for turnovers and can both manage and win games, which Peyton did not show in that rookie season.

Pretty easy to look back through history and pick Peyton. But excuse me, I have some more box scores to scout from Rolling Eyes


You want to eliminate context when talking about football...do you realize how stupid that sounds?

What did Manning do better besides being bigger and more talented? The guy was still ridiculously intelligent, he commanded that team and still had his legendary poise at that age. Yea, he had his ups and downs(mainly ups after the first 4 to 6 games) but he was asked to carry a bad team. And I know someone is going to throw out Marvin Harrison and Faulk as if that somehow proves Manning was on a great team.

Harrison played hurt that year and hadn't yet developed into the Marvin Harrison who is a top 10 WR of all time...he was still above average Marvin Harrison dealing with an injury. Aside from Marvin, his receiving targets were Torrance Small, Jerome Pathon, Ken Dilger and Marcus Pollard. Not exactly a talented group. So Marshall Faulk became his #1 WR. That's right, his top receiver was his running back.

As great of a receiver as Faulk was, that still shouldn't happen. It was basically Manning and Faulk carrying the offense behind a shaky OL.

The Colts made Manning shoulder the burden from the get go. He showed amazing talent through the year but also made mistakes as a rookie will trying to carry a team. Which is why I don't judge Andrew Luck too harshly in Indy, I just think he's getting an undue amount of credit. That said, I think it would be ridiculous to say that you'd trade Luck for Russell Wilson right now. Which is essentially what you're saying for Manning.

That if given the choice after each player's rookie year...not knowing what'll happen in the future...you'd take Wilson over Manning. As good as Wilson is playing and as talented as he is, Manning was still the #1 pick with incredible attributes and talent. You don't move on from a player like that because another player in a better situation had a better rookie year.

I mean consider this, when talking about the most elite of the elite QB prospects, people say he's the best QB prospect since Manning...that's how elite of a prospect Manning was.

So excuse me if I choose context and am able to look past more than just the numbers when considering something like this.

hawksman81 wrote:


Iím talking about strictly their rookie seasons, not going forward.


In that context, what's the point of the comparison?
_________________
The LBC wrote:
Harper41 wrote:
Don't worry. Sean Payton would pass the ball in a Tornado.

But would he do it in a Sharknado?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Bigjoe0075


Joined: 18 Nov 2009
Posts: 2145
Location: Eastern Washinton
PostPosted: Wed Dec 26, 2012 12:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I was absolutely pissed when we drafted Wilson. We just signed Flynn and still had Tjack. Personally I thought Wilson would be a giant waste of a pick. I believe after I heard that pick I shut off my TV so depressed with the Seahawks draft I couldn't stomach it anymore. But JS and Pete made the right decision. I swallowed my pride a long time ago. Ate a shhhhhit ton of crow and now am excited for Seattle's future.

As for Osprey you are being irrational. Plain and simple the arguments for Wilson and our success with him at the helm are valid. Therefore if you can't agree then you loose credibility. In my eyes at least. I know you have football knowledge but unless you recognize the argument in Russells favor is legitimate I find you irrational and less credible.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> Seattle Seahawks All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Page 7 of 9

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group